Edelbrock Perfomer Intake vs Edelbrock RPM Intake

Discussion in 'Classic Mustang Specific Tech' started by 68dreamer, Jan 7, 2007.

  1. I have a stock 289. Looking to swap out my intake and caberator. Just wondering which intake to get. Also thinking about getting a 600cfm caberator from Edelbrock. Will this caberator be to big? This car is a daily driver (spring through fall) and cold weather is a issue because I live in Maine. Thanks for the input
  2. Get the RPM. The Performer is simply an aluminum copy of the stock iron intakes. The RPM will perform as well as the stocker on the bottom end but will give it a boost on top. Other Intakes that work as well as the RPM are Ford's own A321 and Weiand's Stealth. The Edlebrock carb won't be too big. 600 is a good size for a 289/302.
  3. I disagree with D.Hearne. On a stock 289, you will be very disappointed with an Edelbrock Performer RPM or Weiand Stealth or a Cobra style intake like the M-9424-A321.

    These are dual plane high rise intakes designed to be used in the 1500-6500rpm range. If by "Stock", you mean what I assume you mean, a hydraulic 2bbl 289 with low compression, stock iron heads, stock cam, stock log exhaust manifolds, etc...than a high rise intake than can produce power to 6500rpm is not what you want.

    The Edelbrock Performer 289 (part # 2121) or the Weiand Action Plus (part # 8011) would be better suited for a stock 289 with no other major modifications of any kind. The Performer 289 and Action Plus have smaller intake runners that will better match the smaller intake ports of the stock heads, and help keep velocity up which is what you need. The bigger intake runners on the Performer RPM or Stealth will slow down the velocity trying to feed the small intake ports on the stock iron 289 heads.

    The 600cfm carb size is good, but think carefully about which manifold you pick. Mustang & Fords magazine did a dyno test on a stone stock 289 mustang a year or two back, and one of the first things they did was swap a Performer RPM manifold and 600cfm carb on an entirely stock 289, and it ran terrible and barely picked up any power no matter how much they fiddled with ignition timing or jet sizing. With your stock 289 iron heads and a low lift cam, 5000rpm is about as high as you can wind it. The Performer and Action Plus intakes better suit your rpm range.
  4. Have you actually tried any of the intakes I listed yourself ? :D And not just read some magazine article ? I have and there's no loss of performance on even stock engines. Last one I tried was a bone stock 5.0 pulled from an 88 Crown Vic (we're talking about a 150 horse motor here) and the Perfomer RPM worked fine with a Holley 600. And the A321 style intake has been in use since the mid 60's. Back then, both Ford and Edelbrock produced it, the Edlebrock version was the F4B, Ford made it under three or four different names : The Shelby "Cobra" high rise, Ford's C9OX were just two. I have one on the mild 5.0 (this motor is basically an Explorer shortblock topped with home ported, stock valved E7 heads, hp output is in the 250-300 hp range) in my 89 Ranger now and it's also fine from idle to 6000 rpms and it's even overcarbed with a list 3310 Holley 750.:nice:
  5. It's interesting you should ask. I've personally used the Edelbrock Performer 289, the Ford Racing M-9424-A321 Cobra replica, an original C5OE iron 289 4 barrel intake, and am currently using an Edelbrock Performer RPM Air-Gap. I've used the Cobra replica, the Performer 289, and the Factory Iron intake on a set of stock 289 heads, and have used the Cobra replica and the stock iron 4bbl intake on a set of GT-40P heads, and have used the cobra replica and the RPM Air-Gap on my AFR 165s....so I actually have hands on experience, and I just so happen to also read alot of articles and books, crazy combination I know...

    Comparing a stock 5.0 and a stock 289 isn't really the same thing. A stock 2bbl C Code 289 in good tune (but, again, bone stock) will only put out about 130hp at the rear wheels. Your 88 Crown Vic 5.0 had a higher lift roller cam and SEFI and made a lot more torque and 20-30 more hp than a stone stock 289 at the rear wheels. The 2bbl 289 has a hydraulic flat tappet that only has .380"-ish lift (if I remember right), and stock 289 heads don't flow as well as the later 5.0's E7TE heads, not to say that the E7TE flows a boat load of cfm, but on average they flow about 20cfm more per intake port than 289 heads, and that in conjunction with the higher lift 5.0 roller cam and the longer runners of the EFI manifold, make the EFI 5.0 a torquier, stronger motor.

    The 5.0/302 and the early 289 are very, very similar as far as the block goes, but they are not the same thing. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, for a stone stock 289, with a cam that doesn't break .400" lift, with small port heads that only flow around 125cfm, with log style exhaust manifolds, etc, etc, that that motor will never see past 5000rpm. That being the case, a manifold like an Action Plus or a Performer which are rated to 5500rpm will be better suited for a stone stock single-point, low-compression 289 than a Performer RPM or equivalent.
  6. Hey U2 thanks for the input. Just wonder does your anything change if I decide to go with a bigger cam?
  7. The 88 Crown Vic 5.0 had a similar lift/duration (less than .400 lift and a 244/256 advertised duration) cam to the 289's combined with lesser flowing heads than the 289's had. These were the E6SE heads. And it still ran fine from idle to 5500 rpms with the RPM intake. No dead spots on bottom. The A321 and it's predecessors have been run successfully with these motors for 40 years by thousands of people. With these intakes (high rise dual plane) he'll still have the bottom end he has now, plus he'll not be limited to future upgrades like he will with a Performer intake. But if he wants to waste his money, fine go right ahead.:shrug: If he wants just mediocre performance AND save money, then I'd suggest he buy a used Performer or either the stock 289/302 4 bbl intake or an 80's aluminum stock 4 bbl intake. All these can be had for $50-75. :nice:
  8. Well, I guess that's the main difference. I was going off of what he said in his original post and that only. He said a stock 289. You are recommending something for him to grow into, which he didn't mention.

    The fact of the matter is, no matter how you slice it, on a stock 289, you will make a hair better horsepower and a fair amount more torque with a standard performer versus a performer rpm. I have seen too many dyno tests comparing the two and driven both on a 289 to budge on that statement. That statement falls flat on its face of course above, say, 4000rpm, where the Performer RPM will murder the Performer in power from that point on, even on a stock motor.

    The only thing is though....where does a stock 289 live 99.99% of its life, shooting from stop sign to stop sign around town, on the freeway, etc.?

    Under 4000rpm.
  9. i say go with the rpm intake if you plan upgrades in the future. in fact i recommend that you change cams while you have the old intake off. use a high energy 268h cam from comp cams.
  10. I'll just throw in my two cents here. When I got my car the previous owner (who I knew well) rebuilt the engine to stock except for the cam which needed to be replaced. He put a mild Colt Cam in it. The stock two barrel intake and manifold went back on, as did the exhaust manifolds. I put on headers, a new Edelbrock 600, and a Perfomer manifold. Needless to say there was drastic increase in performance, efficiency, and fuel economy (so long as you weren't trying to shove your right foot through the firewall).

    Now I'm not saying that there are not better options out there from a power perspective and I'm not saying I would choose this particular manifold over something else if given the choice. I was on a budget and I was able to get this manifold and a pair of Edelbrock Signature tall valve covers new, in the box, all told for $200 because they had been bought for a truck the seller never installed them on and they were taking up garage space.

    The difference in performance can only be measured relative to what he currently has, and the level of performance required is regulated by what his final goal is (even though that may be in a state of constant change).
  11. Here is another idea. Edelbrock builds packages with matched parts so that you can build to a particular RPM range. Decide how you really drive your car and match the package. Take a look at the website for more info and dyno information. I have the Performer intake, cam, and 500 cfm carb and am very please with the gain I got. I have not had the engine on a dyno but it "feels" great and gets reasonable mileage (17 on the highway) with a C4 and tall diff.

    Have fun!
  12. Having run both the RPM and performer on my 84 with the afr heads, I sold the RPM cheap... I did port match the performer. Stock cam with 1.7's.
  13. I wouldn't think a Performer could keep up with AFR heads.
  14. 2x post, sorry..

  15. his ET and MPH seem to support your theory.

    On a somewhat similar note...I swapped my action plus intake and tri-y headers for a stealth and hooker comps and shaved .5 off my 1/8th mile times. I'm not sure which was the worst retriction, but I'll never use either again.
  16. My friend was in the same boat with a 67 and a stock 289 2v auto. His car was a dog even with long tubes and full exhaust. We swapped to just the edelbrock performer and a 600 cfm edelbrock carb and he can now at least break the tires loose. Acceleration is a lot better, a huge improvement over what it was. It still isn't a fast car but a worthy improvement considering his exhaust costed more with less gains.
  17. Buddy of mine races vintage with a 'stock' 65 K-code.
    They allow few mods, but he slipped an RPM on there once and the car developed a very 'soggy bottom' being stock and Tri-Y'd.
    He swears by the stock 4v intake.
    The Performer is even more restrictive than stock because they were shooting for port velocity by using smaller ports.

    I have used Performer, stock iron, RPM, and Stealth...
    If you are daily driving and don't have headers, use stock or Performer.
    If you are planning on upgrading cam and/or using headers one day, use the Stealth. The RPM was very *flat up top for me and the Stealth seems to have more equal runners.

    Also, I don't care for Edelbrock carbs (Carter, Federal Mogul, whatever the name is this week).
    A conservatively tuned Holley 1850 would be perfect for your combo.
    If you do go E'brock, get a 500 unless you plan those upgrades soon.

    Good luck

    *Edit: By 'flat' I meant 'weak'...
  18. Can't look at it that way man...

    Yeah, you didn't have power because of the 2v intake, but if you hadn't done the exhaust first, you would gain very little from a 4v.

    The exhaust has to be done for any other mods to shine.

    Except for the case of a daily driver, as in this post, I would say headers come before any mod.
  19. I know exhaust is part of why it's doing much better now but I don't think the 289 was lacking in getting the air out... It was being choked going in from the poor 2bbl. Without the full exhaust it probably would have been a bit restricted but not moreso than the intake/carb.
  20. I'll only report on my experience going from stock c-code 2V with manifolds and dual exhaust which ran [email protected] 2V was a dog after 4K. I used a performer (because I already had it from my first stang 10 years ago) and holley 600. Car pulled better up top but still lays down by 5K rpm. Car ran much better in quarter and went [email protected] Almost 5 mph consistently which told me it was making more power. The latest mod was a set of 1.5" longtubes which allows it to rev higher but doesn't pull like I'd like it to. Have run best of [email protected] But I think some of the header improvement times came from power shifting which wasn't done previously. 289 is coming out, standby:nice: